Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)
-   -   Where will these end up? (Hopefully not at an US regional) (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/29489-where-will-these-end-up-hopefully-not-us-regional.html)

Superpilot92 08-02-2008 07:08 PM

Fortunatly most majors have scope language that blocks that aircraft from flying anywhere other than at Mainline. I know at least CAL and the NWA/DAL scope prevents that flying at a regional.

RickJames 08-02-2008 07:13 PM


Originally Posted by Superpilot92 (Post 437680)
Fortunatly most majors have scope language that blocks that aircraft from flying anywhere other than at Mainline. I know at least CAL and the NWA/DAL scope prevents that flying at a regional.

Let's hope it stays that way too....that aircraft should not be flying anywhere but Mainline.....

hslightnin 08-02-2008 07:27 PM


Originally Posted by Superpilot92 (Post 437680)
Fortunatly most majors have scope language that blocks that aircraft from flying anywhere other than at Mainline. I know at least CAL and the NWA/DAL scope prevents that flying at a regional.

hey with 70 odd seats that thing would be pretty comfy

Superpilot92 08-02-2008 07:30 PM


Originally Posted by hslightnin (Post 437689)
hey with 70 odd seats that thing would be pretty comfy

There is still a max takeoff weight limitation in the scope provision preventing it.

JetJock16 08-02-2008 07:33 PM

US regionals have no use for the 100 seater when scope restricts them to less! Think about it, why would a regional buy them over the CR7 or CR9 when they’re restricted to 50 (CAL), 66 (UAL) or 76 (DAL)? We fly the CR9 and when fitted with 76 seats it has plenty of performance, very very few weight or cg issues and the fuel burn is still justified with fewer seats. Why buy the CR10 if you can't add seats in order to offset the increased fuel burn.

Only US Airways (that I know of) has scope high enough to justify a regional purchasing this a/c; but I wouldn’t worry about Parker letting the cat out of the bag seeing they are now operating E-190’s and at regional pay rates to boot.

JetJock16 08-02-2008 07:35 PM


Originally Posted by hslightnin (Post 437689)
hey with 70 odd seats that thing would be pretty comfy

The CR9 is comfy with 76 seats (9 first class); a CR10 operated with 70 seats.....................well that sounds like something Midwest would do. :rolleyes:

groovinaviator 08-02-2008 07:43 PM

Doesn't Mesa flight the CR9 with 86 seats?

ToiletDuck 08-02-2008 07:45 PM


Originally Posted by Superpilot92 (Post 437680)
Fortunatly most majors have scope language that blocks that aircraft from flying anywhere other than at Mainline. I know at least CAL and the NWA/DAL scope prevents that flying at a regional.

EXACTLY. It's up to the unions not to relax on scope for this. I find it hypocritical when everyone at the majors say "The CRJ700/900 and E-170/175s aren't regional jets". Where do they think they came from? The regionals of today were born because or relaxation of scope yesterday.

JetJock16 08-02-2008 07:49 PM


Originally Posted by groovinaviator (Post 437699)
Doesn't Mesa flight the CR9 with 86 seats?

Yes they do, but why would Mesa bring the CR10 online if their flying is being somewhat reduced and the 86 seat flying they have is already covered by CR9's. Remember that Parker's very happy with his E-190 which are operated at regional pay rates and btw are configured with 99 seats (88 coach and 11 first).

Superpilot92 08-02-2008 08:03 PM

All planes should have been mainline aircraft from the start and we would all have better careers and longevity as a result. More and more people are waking up the importance of scope and the effects of not taking it seriously.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:15 AM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands